Canaan Christian Church v. Montgomery Cnty.

491 F.Supp.3d 39

CANAAN CHRISTIAN CHURCH, Burtonsville Crossing, LLC, Burtonsville Associates, Jennifer M. Sarem and Marion G. Sarem, Plaintiffs,

v.MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND, Montgomery County Council and Isiah Leggett, County Executive, Defendants.

Civil Action No. TDC-16-3698

United States District Court, D. Maryland.

Signed September 30, 2020

Michele McDaniel Rosenfeld, Law Office of Michele Rosenfeld LLC, Rockville, MD, for Plaintiffs Canaan Christian Church, Jennifer M. Sarem, Marion G. Sarem.

Michele McDaniel Rosenfeld, Law Office of Michele Rosenfeld LLC, Rockville, MD, A Donald C. Discepolo, Discepolo LLP, Columbia, MD, for Plaintiff Burtonsville Crossing, LLC.

Michele McDaniel Rosenfeld, Law Office of Michele Rosenfeld LLC, Rockville, MD, Blair Lazarus Storzer, Roman Paul Storzer, Storzer & Associates, P.C., Washington, DC, Robin Pick, Storzer & Associates, P.C., Pikesville, MD, for Plaintiff Burtonsville Associates.

Christine M. Collins, John Paul Markovs, Patricia Lisehora Kane, Office of the Montgomery County Attorney, Erek Lawrence Barron, Roberto Montesinos, Whiteford Taylor and Preston LLP, Rockville, MD, Aaron L. Casagrande, Cara Chasney Murray, Harry S. Johnson, Howard Ross Feldman, Patrick Dugan McKevitt, Whiteford Taylor and Preston LLP, Baltimore, MD, for Defendant Maryland Montgomery County.

Christine M. Collins, John Paul Markovs, Patricia Lisehora Kane, Office of the Montgomery County Attorney, Roberto Montesinos, Erek Lawrence Barron, Whiteford Taylor and Preston LLP, Rockville, MD, Aaron L. Casagrande, Cara Chasney Murray, Harry S. Johnson, Howard Ross Feldman, Patrick Dugan McKevitt, Whiteford Taylor and Preston LLP, Baltimore, MD, for Defendants Montgomery County Council, Isiah Leggett.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

THEODORE D. CHUANG, United States District Judge Plaintiffs Burtonsville Crossing, LLC ("Burtonsville Crossing"), Burtonsville Associates, Jennifer M. Sarem, and Marion G. Sarem (collectively, the "Landowner Plaintiffs") each own adjacent, undeveloped parcels of land (collectively, "the Properties") in Burtonsville, Maryland, located in Montgomery County, that are presently restricted from receiving sewer service. Plaintiff Canaan Christian Church ("Canaan") has entered into a contract with the Landowner Plaintiffs to purchase the Properties in order to build a 2,000-seat church, contingent on extending the public sewer line to the Properties. To that end, in 2013, Plaintiffs filed Water and Sewer Category Change Requests ("WSCCRs") seeking an exception to the sewer restriction. In 2015, those WSCCRs were denied. Plaintiffs have now filed suit against Defendants Montgomery County, Maryland; the Montgomery County Council; and County Executive Isiah Leggett (collectively, "the County") asserting that the denial of the WSCCRs violated their rights under various provisions of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act ("RLUIPA"), 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000cc – 2000cc-5 (2018), as well as their rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The County has filed a Motion for Summary Judgment seeking judgment as a matter of law on all of Plaintiffs’ claims. Plaintiffs, in turn, have filed a Cross Motion for Summary Judgment on all of their claims. The Court has reviewed the submitted materials and held a hearing on the Motions on September 23, 2020. For the reasons set forth below, the County's Motion for Summary Judgment will be GRANTED, and Plaintiffs’ Cross Motion for Summary Judgment will be DENIED.

BACKGROUND

I. Land Use Regulations

The land on which Canaan proposes to build a church is located in Burtonsville, Maryland, within the Patuxent River watershed ("the Patuxent Watershed"). It sits in a triangular area bounded on the east by U.S. Route 29, on the west by Old Columbia Pike, and on the north by Dustin Road. The land consist of five adjacent parcels (collectively, "the Properties") totaling 38.5 acres: parcels 95, 226, 230, 293, and 365. Parcel 95 is owned by Marion Sarem; parcels 226 and 230 are owned by Jennifer Sarem; parcel 293 ("the BA Parcel") is owned by Burtonsville Associates; and parcel 365 ("the BC Parcel") is owned by Burtonsville Crossing, whose president is Thomas Norris. None of the parcels has public water or sewer service, but the Properties abut other parcels that do have public water and sewer.

Prior to 1981, the Properties were zoned "Rural." Joint Record ("J.R.") 178, ECF No. 142. In 1981, the Eastern Montgomery County Planning Area Master Plan ("1981 ECMP") rezoned the Properties to "Rural Cluster" ("RC"). The RC zone allows residences and religious assemblies as permitted uses. The 1981 ECMP recommended that sewer service not be extended to property covered by the 1981 ECMP lying inside the Patuxent Watershed, citing concerns about adverse effects on the regional water supply. In 1993, the Functional Master Plan for the Patuxent River Watershed created a "Primary Management Area" ("PMA"), an area designed to function as a "stream buffer," land that acts as a transition area between a stream and any development, as a means to ensure water quality. J.R. 407. The PMA included either some or all of the Properties.

In 1997, the Fairland Master Plan was adopted, and it recommended, as to the area in which the BC Parcel is located, that no more than 10 percent of the area of a property could have an impervious surface, and that sewer service not be extended there, with water service to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. As for the BA Parcel, the Fairland Master Plan recommended that water and sewer be permitted on a case-by-case basis for special exception uses, defined as day care or elderly housing. The remaining parcels within the Properties fell under the Fairland Master Plan's general recommendation that future development should be limited to the already existing commercial area.

In 2012, the County adopted a new master plan, the Burtonsville Crossing Neighborhood Plan ("BCNP"), which amended the 1997 Fairland Master Plan. In the BCNP, the Properties are again zoned RC and designated part of the "Rural Edge Neighborhood." J.R. 275. Under the BCNP, properties in the Rural Edge Neighborhood "should retain their low-density zoning to protect the Patuxent River Watershed," and "[n]ew development ... will be limited to eight percent imperviousness without development in the stream buffers and without public sewer." J.R. 275. As to the northern part of the Rural Edge Neighborhood, in which the Properties are located, the BCNP specifically recommends that "no public sewer service should be permitted for any use." J.R. 278. The BCNP explained that these recommendations were prompted by declining water quality in the Patuxent Watershed and were intended to protect the Patuxent River tributary headwaters, which originate in Burtonsville.

II. The Water & Sewer Plan

In 2003, the County adopted the Comprehensive Ten-Year Water Supply and Sewerage Systems Plan ("the Water & Sewer Plan"), which designates the Properties as W-6 and S-6, signifying areas for which there is no planned community water and sewer service within the 10-year scope of the plan or beyond. Those designations were consistent with the prior water and sewer designations for the Properties. The Water & Sewer Plan includes a Private Institutional Facilities Policy ("the PIF Policy"), which provides a procedure for federally tax-exempt organizations such as religious institutions to submit a "category change request" that would allow for an amendment to the Water & Sewer Plan designations in order to provide them with water and sewer services. J.R. 438-39; Joint Statement of Undisputed Facts ("JSUF") ¶¶ 46-47, ECF No. 141. For private institutional facilities ("PIFs") seeking a category change for land outside the existing sewer envelope—the area intended to receive public sewer service under a water and sewer plan—a WSCCR "may be approved" for sites that abut existing or approved water or sewer mains. J.R. 439. In general, however, the Water & Sewer Plan provides that water and sewer decisions "should follow and implement the land use development guidelines established in the County's General Plan and local area master plans." J.R. 425.

As to PIFs, the Water & Sewer Plan expressly notes that "issues affecting private institutional uses" cannot be addressed only "within the context of the Water and Sewer Plan." J.R. 432. Instead, proposed PIF uses would need to be addressed "in the context of ... master plans, zoning and subdivision ordinances, and water quality regulations." J.R. 432. In particular, "[a]mong the concerns" that have arisen as a result of the implementation of the PIF Policy is that it had "promoted speculative interest in sites because of their potential ability to satisfy the PIF policy requirements, not because a specific private institution has a need for that site." J.R. 431. Another concern was that the PIF Policy "cannot address issues beyond the scope of the Water and Sewer Plan, such as community compatibility, traffic congestion, and alternate facility uses." J.R. 439-B.

Category change requests, through the PIF Policy or otherwise, are made by filing a WSCCR with the Montgomery County Department of Environmental Protection ("DEP"). The DEP requests comments on the WSCCR from the Montgomery County Planning Board ("Planning Board"), the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission ("WSSC"), and other agencies. The WSCCR and comments from those entities are then sent to the County Executive, who sends the application and his recommendation to the Montgomery County Council ("the Council"). Separately, the Planning Board holds a public hearing on the WSCCR, after which it provides its own, formal recommendations to the Council. After holding its own public hearing on the WSCCR, the Council then takes one of four actions: (1) approves, (2) conditionally approves, (3) defers, (...